Town and country planning
Series: Estates Gazette Case Summaries ; [2000] EGCS 111 (21/10/00)Publication details: 2000Subject(s): Summary: "Retail Media Ltd v SOS Environment" QBD 11 October 2000. The claimant was refused advertising consent for a poster panel near similar advertisements on a bus shelter. The claimant appealed using Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992 regulation 4(1). The advertisement control officer concluded that 'displays on bus shelters are not directly comparable in amenity terms' and dismissed the appeal because of the adverse affect of the proposed advertisment. The claimant challenged the inspector on the grounds that he failed to give adequate reasons for his conclusion on the point of consistency. "Held", claim allowed.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London News article | WB3642-26 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 108962-1001 |
"Retail Media Ltd v SOS Environment" QBD 11 October 2000. The claimant was refused advertising consent for a poster panel near similar advertisements on a bus shelter. The claimant appealed using Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992 regulation 4(1). The advertisement control officer concluded that 'displays on bus shelters are not directly comparable in amenity terms' and dismissed the appeal because of the adverse affect of the proposed advertisment. The claimant challenged the inspector on the grounds that he failed to give adequate reasons for his conclusion on the point of consistency. "Held", claim allowed.